# OBJECTIONS TO G. E. ZINOV’EV’S OBSERVATIONS

Source: PSS vol. 54

You ask: Did the “era” spanning 1789–1871 preclude non-national wars? Indeed it did not—far from it! But let us be clear: just as the present era of imperialist wars, in the same sense (that is, as isolated phenomena that do not alter the overarching historical trajectory), likewise does not preclude national wars. This, I submit, is all that needs to be said.

Pages 27–28. The very act of acknowledging the intensification of concentration—brought about by the brutal mechanisms of imperialism—does not yet constitute annexationism. In fact, the charge of annexationism, as you have formulated it, strikes me as rather far-fetched. Radek and his comrades are inconsistent internationalists, not inconsistent annexationists. They may well succumb to a kind of “Kunoism” if they carry their line of reasoning to its logical conclusion. But at this stage, to accuse them of such a position—
in other words, to claim that these positions are inherently impossible—is simply to miss the mark. For what is at stake here is not whether certain wars are “possible” or “impossible,” but rather whether they can be transformed into something else—whether they can be reoriented toward a different purpose, or even rendered obsolete through the dialectical movement of history itself.

To say that “phenomenon X is possible” is one and the same as saying that “phenomenon X is not excluded.”

This is precisely the point: the two formulations are identical in meaning.

The entire article directed against Junius is devoted to making this very argument—and to developing it further, offering concrete examples. There, we read: “Even a hopeless war is still a war”—and the conditions under which a hopeless war might be transformed into a hopeful one are explicitly laid out! To maintain that there are no hopeless wars in history—or that hopeless wars can never become hopeful—this, in my view, is nothing less than “imperialist economism.”794

Radek’s annexationism does not lie in this; nor do I see any annexationist tendencies in his approach. Consider this: is there not, in the very act of renouncing in advance the restoration of nations in Europe, a form of “annexationism”—albeit an inconsistent, unprincipled annexationism?

Answer me this question!

Indeed! That is correct.*

This will be addressed in the next article, which will examine Kautskyism in general.

Here, we must first unpack why disarmament is sheer nonsense.795 Radek and his colleagues have failed to grasp the fundamental issue: why Kautskyism is so absurd, and why it is fundamentally misstated.

Impossible!!

Advocates for Legin!!
“Word and Deed”!
The critique of their views will gain much more force if it is framed in a more objective manner.

Page 33. “As long as we are unable—and because we are unable—to accomplish a socialist revolution, workers must unite ever more closely.” Is it really only a matter of “as long as” and “because we are unable”? (A stylistic revision would be beneficial here.)

It would be highly advantageous if you were to devote a separate section to exploring the relationship between the slogan of “United States of Europe” and the principle of self-determination. Radek and his colleagues insist that these two concepts are one and the same. In a foundational article that seeks to critically examine all of their “arguments,” it is hardly appropriate to sidestep this crucial question.

Moreover, it would be wise to soften the tone of the text overall.

Such a refinement would only enhance the persuasiveness of the argument. And since you have already treated them as misguided friends—which I found particularly commendable—such an approach will only serve to strengthen the article’s impact.

As for minor details, proofreaders should consider replacing the term “scoundrels” with a less harsh, more nuanced expression.

---

Written in 1916, no later than July

First published from manuscript

OUTLINE FOR A REPORT ON THE REVOLUTION OF 1905**

1) January 22 (January 9) = the beginning of the revolution. The war accelerated…

2) A brief summary of events from January 22 onward.

3) The most significant transformations.

* – completed. Ed.

** See “Report on the Revolution of 1905” in Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 30, pp. 306–328. Ed.

OUTLINE FOR A REPORT ON THE REVOLUTION OF 1905

(Struve, January 7: “There is no revolutionary people,” 5–9. Trotsky.)
Gapon—a priest turned revolutionary.

A petition to the Tsar-Father. The revolution.

The direct mobilization of the masses against the head of state authority.

The revolutionaries: a small group—just a few hundred individuals—whose leadership was drawn from the ranks of the proletariat, and who, through this very connection, came to embody the vanguard of the revolution.

Trotsky, 1–2–3, at the end

4) Strikes—(the first revolution in world history, best understood and studied through the lens of strike statistics).

5) 45… (1895–1904) 80 (1903)
2,800 (1905) – 400 (January 1905)
(In a single month, the number of strikes reached levels previously seen over ten years prior to the revolution.)

6) Waves of strikes: the vanguard and the rear guard.
Metalworkers and those lagging behind.
The North and Northwest—the vanguard…

7) Economic and political strikes.

8) Spring 1905—beginning of the peasant movement… (the substance of the bourgeois revolution).

9) June 28 (June 15), 1905—the uprising aboard the Potemkin…

10) Three waves: the first wave of strikes—leading, self-organized, and largely autonomous. The peasant movement—though nearly incomparable (significantly weaker),
unfortunately, only about 1/15 of the total—roughly 2,000 out of 30,000—were destroyed by fire.

11) Boycotting the August Duma… parliamentarianism… Military uprisings (compare 1825 with 1905).

12) The climax: October and December 1905—rallies at the university… 74.

Trotsky. Kharkiv, October 23, 1905.

October: the first mass strike of a political and revolutionary character across the entire country.
(+ 69. Trotsky. Railway workers, postal officials.)
Manifesto of October 30 (October 17), 1905.

XII: The Moscow Uprising… 214. Trotsky: Gorky.
9 days: 2–2–1. Trotsky (Max Weber on the role of the “Lenin Group”)…
219: Trotsky. The cannon fired on October 25, 1905, in Moscow.
222: Moscow, 1905. Berlin, 1848.
(“An eight-hour workday and weapons.” 164. Trotsky.)

The peak of political strikers… the eight-hour workday. The retreat of the bourgeoisie. Lockouts.

The peak of the peasant movement…

The peak of military uprisings…
185–6 (Trotsky): workers and peasants in the military uprising.

The Soviets of Workers’ Deputies…

13) The victory of the counterrevolution (December 1905)…

A loan of 2 billion francs: spring 1906! (NB)

14) Attempts to resume the offensive.

I Duma (spring 1906)… (The Peasant Party + Social Democrats.) Waves of strikes
and the final wave of the peasant movement.

II Duma (spring 1907)… No peasant movement whatsoever—only weak waves of strikes.

15) The State Coup of June 3 (June 16), 1907. The onset of a counterrevolutionary era
that would last until 1912.

16) Significance: (.) Russia is being renewed (Leo Tolstoy
expresses regret)*

* See “On the Electoral Campaign and Electoral Platform,” Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 20, p. 362. Ed.

OUTLINE FOR A REPORT ON THE REVOLUTION OF 1905

(.) Asia is in revolt (Turkey, Persia, China)
(.) The European labor movement: Austria.
(.) A prototype and prologue to the coming European revolution—
in a certain sense, proletarian in character.
A prototype and prologue in four respects:
(.) a concrete understanding of the growing activism of the masses.

The mass uprising against ((Strikes)) directed at state authority
(.) The role of the mass strike
NB “Hidden Socialism” (Engels)*
The finest exposition in German: Rosa Luxemburg (with particular reference to the peculiarities of the struggle in Western Europe)...

Rosa Luxemburg: “The Mass Strike, the Party, and the Trade Unions”
(Hamburg, 1906)
NB Polish students:
Katscher, 245
203 (.) The involvement of the military, of the army, in the struggle.
||| (.) Civil war. (Cf. Kautsky in “The Social Revolution” (1902):

“The Coming Revolution”... “will resemble less a sudden insurrection
against the authorities and more a civil war…” p. 48).

* This refers to a letter from F. Engels to F. Sorge dated February 22, 1888. See K. Marx and F. Engels, Collected Works, vol. XXVIII, 1940, pp. 16–17. Ed.

Additions to the Plan*
Approximately 70 million desyatins of large-scale landholdings
Approximately 70 » » of the poorest peasants
+ The dissemination of social-democratic literature
+ National movements
+ The Jewish pogroms of October 1905: 100 cities, 4,000 killed, 10,000 maimed
1 1 4, Trotsky

Written earlier on January 9 (22)

First published in 1934.

In Lenin’s Collection XXVI

Printed from manuscript

Translated from German

PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF AMENDMENTS

TO THE PARTY PROGRAM OF THE RSDLP

At the end of the program’s principled section (after the words: “from the standpoint of the proletariat”), insert:

World capitalism has now reached—roughly since the beginning of the 20th century—a stage of imperialism. Imperialism, or the era of finance capital, represents
a highly developed form of capitalist economy in which monopolistic associations of capitalists—syndicates, cartels, trusts—have acquired decisive importance; banking capital of immense concentration has merged with industrial capital; the export of capital to foreign lands has expanded to enormous proportions; the entire world has already been territorially divided
among the wealthiest nations, and the economic partition of the globe among international trusts has begun.

* Written in the margins of the manuscript, to the right of items 8–11. Ed.

DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE PARTY PROGRAM OF THE RSDLP

Imperialist wars—namely, wars waged for domination over the world, for markets for
banking capital, for the suppression of small and weak nationalities—are inevitable under such conditions. And it was precisely this that characterized the First Great Imperialist War of 1914–1917.

Moreover, the extraordinarily high stage of development reached by world capitalism as a whole, the shift from free competition to monopolistic capitalism, the preparation by banks—and by associations of capitalists—of an apparatus for the social regulation of the processes of production and distribution of goods, and the horrors, calamities, ruin, and barbarization brought about by imperialist war—all of this transforms the present stage of capitalist development into an era of proletarian, socialist revolution.

This era has begun.

Only a proletarian, socialist revolution can lead humanity out of the deadlock created by imperialism and imperialist wars. No matter what difficulties the revolution may encounter, or how many temporary setbacks it may suffer, or how many waves of counterrevolution may arise—final victory for the proletariat is inevitable.

Given the objective conditions of the epoch we are living through, the task at hand therefore calls for the comprehensive, immediate preparation of the proletariat for revolution, and for a resolute break with that bourgeois perversion of socialism which has come to dominate official social-democratic parties in the form of the social‑chauvinist current (that is, socialism in word only, chauvinism in deed—or the use of the slogan “defense of the fatherland” as a cover for the defense of capitalist interests in imperialist wars), as well as in the form of the “center” current (that is, unprincipled, aimless vacillations between social-chauvinism and the revolutionary, internationalist struggle of the proletariat*) for the conquest of political power in order to implement the economic and political measures that constitute the substance of socialist revolution.

* The text “a resolute break with revolution… through proletarian struggle” has been crossed out in the manuscript. Ed.

* * *

The fulfillment of this task—requiring complete trust, the closest fraternal alliance, and the direct unity of revolutionary action among the working class of all advanced countries—is impossible without an immediate and principled break with that bourgeois perversion of socialism which has triumphed at the highest levels of the vast majority of official social-democratic parties. On the one hand, this perversion takes the form of social-chauvinism: socialism in word only, chauvinism in deed, cloaking the predatory interests of “one’s own” national bourgeoisie behind the slogan of “defense of the fatherland”; on the other hand, there is the equally broad and international current known as the “center,” which stands in solidarity with the social-chauvinists, seeking to preserve or reform the bankrupt Second International, wavering between social-chauvinism and the revolutionary, internationalist struggle of the proletariat for the realization of a socialist system.

* * *

The experiences of the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917, which gave rise to the Soviets of Workers’ Deputies and a host of similar organizations, thereby confirmed the lessons of the Paris Commune: that in order to transition to socialism, the proletariat requires a state—but this state must not be a state of the conventional type. Rather, it must be a direct, mass-based, universally inclusive organization of armed workers, replacing the old instruments of governance: the standing army, the police, and the bureaucratic apparatus. The task of clarifying for the proletariat the nature of such a state—capable of both

* In the manuscript, the passage “The experience of the Russian revolutions… but this state” was crossed out. The end of the paragraph was inadvertently left uncrossed; it had been written on a separate page, at the bottom of which an annotation in an unknown hand read: “Add: the readiness of production-regulating bodies in the form of trusts and
the concentration of banks” (see V. I. Lenin’s insertion in “Draft Amendments to the Theoretical, Political, and Certain Other Sections of the Program.” Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 32, pp. 139–140). Ed.

DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE PARTY PROGRAM OF THE RSDLP

not only to consolidate the revolutionary gains but also to ensure the most peaceful and systematic transition to socialism—must become one of the primary tasks of the proletarian party, alongside the struggle against those representatives of the bankrupt Second International (1889–1914) who have distorted Marxism and betrayed socialism in their understanding of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Monopolistic capitalism, which during wartime has, with particular rapidity, evolved in a number of advanced countries into state-monopolistic capitalism, signifies the colossal socialization of production and, consequently, the complete preparation of the objective conditions for the establishment of a socialist society*.

* * *

In the minimum program, all text beginning with the words “On the Path” and extending through § 1 should be deleted and replaced with the following:

At this moment in Russia’s history, when the Provisional Government—belonging to the class of landowners and capitalists and enjoying the trust—though necessarily fragile—of broad layers of the petty-bourgeois population—has undertaken to convene a Constituent Assembly, the proletarian party is confronted with the immediate task of struggling for a state structure that best ensures both the economic development and the general rights of the people, as well as the possibility of a transition to socialism that is, above all, as painless as possible.

The party fights—and helps the popular masses to fight immediately—for a democratic republic, beginning with the self-organized, grassroots mobilization of the masses and striving, in the process, to establish not a bourgeois-parliamentary republic, in which the dominance of capitalists is particularly entrenched and in which the use of violence against the masses is all too readily possible through

* In the manuscript, the passage “Monopolistic capitalism… socialist society” was crossed out. Ed.

the preservation of the old organs of mass oppression—police, standing army, bureaucracy—but rather a more democratic proletarian‑peasant republic, in which the retention of these oppressive organs is not only impossible but utterly unacceptable, and in which state power belongs directly to the armed workers and peasants themselves, every single one of them.

§ 1. All supreme authority in the state must reside in representatives of the people, elected by the people and subject to recall at any time by the people, forming a single people’s assembly, a single chamber.

§ 2 – add:
proportional representation in all elections; the accountability of all delegates and elected officials without exception, subject to recall at any time by a majority vote of their constituents.
§ 3 – add:
the abolition of all forms of oversight or control from above over the decisions and actions of regional and local self-governments.
§ 9 should be amended as follows:
the right of all nations within the state to freely secede and to form their own states. The Republic of the Russian People must attract other peoples or nationalities not through force, but solely through the voluntary consent of those peoples to the creation of a common state. The unity and fraternal alliance of workers across all countries are irreconcilable with either direct or indirect violence against other nationalities.
§ 11 should be amended as follows:
the election of judges and all public officials—whether in the civil service or in the military—by the people; the recallability of all such officials at any time by a majority vote of their constituents; the remuneration of all state officials not exceeding the wages of a skilled worker—300–500 rubles, depending on the size of the family and the income earned by its members; and the absolute prohibition, for all public officials, of combining official salaries with income derived from other sources.

DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE PARTY PROGRAM OF THE RSDLP

§ 12 should be amended as follows:

the replacement of the police and the standing army with universal armament of the people; workers and employees must receive payment from capitalists for the time devoted to public service in the national militia.

* * *

§ 14 of the political section, § 5 and other sections of the economic part must, like the entire economic section, be reviewed anew by special commissions composed of activists from the labor movement and educators.

After the financial section of the program (after the words “on income and inheritance”), insert:

The high stage of capitalist development already attained in banking and in trust‑controlled industries, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the devastation wrought by the imperialist war—which everywhere gives rise to demands for state and public oversight of the production and distribution of vital commodities—prompt the party to call for the nationalization of banks, syndicates (trusts), and the like.

* * *

The agrarian program must be replaced by an agrarian resolution (see its text separately)* or reworked in accordance with it**.

* * *

The end of the program (the final two paragraphs, beginning with the words “Striving to achieve”) should be completely omitted.

* See “Resolution on the Agrarian Question,” Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 31, pp. 425–428. Ed.

** See “Materials for the Revision of the Party Program.” Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 32, pp. 143–144.
Ed.

*To the Program

THE IMPROVED VERSION*

The party of the proletariat cannot confine its aspirations to a bourgeois-parliamentary democratic republic—which, wherever it exists in the world, preserves and seeks to perpetuate the monarchical instruments of mass oppression: namely, the police, the standing army, and the privileged bureaucracy.

The party strives for a more democratic proletarian‑peasant republic, one in which the police and the standing army are entirely abolished and replaced by universal arming of the people, by a nationwide militia; in which all officials, without exception, become not only elected but also removable at any time at the demand of the majority of their constituents; in which the salaries of all officials—without exception—are set at a level that does not exceed the average wage of a skilled worker; and in which parliamentary‑representative institutions are gradually replaced by councils of people’s representatives—from different classes and professions, or from different localities—whose role is both to legislate and to implement their own laws.

Written in April, no later than April 28 (May 11), 1917.

First published in 1933.

In the Lenin Collection, Volume XXI.

Printed from the manuscript.

NOTES ON QUESTIONS OF ECONOMIC POLICY

For the Record:

The formation of consumer cooperatives. Consumer and labor booklets.

Begin with the wealthy: consumer‑labor booklets priced at 50 rubles.

* This version was included in the “Draft Amendments to the Theoretical, Political, and Certain Other Sections of the Program” (see Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 32, p. 141). Ed.

PLAN OF THESIS STATEMENTS ON THE IMMEDIATE CONCLUSION OF PEACE

Tenants whose apartments are valued at 2,400 rubles and above, with a number of rooms corresponding to the number of household members, and whose real estate holdings exceed 25,000 rubles.

State and public service positions with salaries starting at 3,000 rubles and above (with a 10‑ruble book allowance).
((1) Preparation for universal labor duty and (2) the fight against sabotage) + ((3)
class-based consolidation of rural workers and the rural poor.)

Private railways (to be nationalized) shall be confiscated.

Joint-stock companies shall be nationalized.

Factories and plants employing more than 20 workers or with an annual turnover exceeding 100,000 rubles shall be confiscated.

The Bolshevik faction of the Central Executive Committee: one representative from each fifth group, serving as “on‑duty” members—or “whips,” or “enforcers.”

Factional Bureau: subordination in voting.

Control and Organizational Commissions, or groups of roving inspectors and organizers (from the Bolshevik faction of the Central Executive Committee).

Roving teams of accountants: banks and other financial institutions.

Written no earlier than December 14 (27)

First published in 1959.

In the Lenin Collection, Volume XXXVI.

Printed from the manuscript.

PLAN OF THESIS STATEMENTS ON THE QUESTION

OF THE IMMEDIATE CONCLUSION OF A SEPARATE

AND ANNECTIVIST PEACE

9. Arguments in favor of an immediate revolutionary war—and the fallacy of those arguments
9. – (gg) (1) “promised”... (cf. October 13, 1915) – – – – (it was our duty to prepare for a revolutionary war)
“Whip”

10. – (aa) (2) international obligations...*
11. – (vv) (3) demoralization...
(bb) (4) “agreement” with German imperialism.*
11 bis | “Agreement” with German imperialism?

That is not true. Consider the example of a strike.
12. Against an immediate revolutionary war and in favor of an annexationist peace:
(.) objectively = Wilson’s agent (100 rubles per soldier).
13. (.) All-in (seizing Revel and Estonia, losing artillery—and perhaps even Petrograd).
14. (.) The impossibility of resolving the tasks of the socialist revolution in Russia while the war continues.
14. (.) The army’s exhaustion and its changing mood—now that it has become democratic.
15. (.) First, crush the Russian bourgeoisie and reorganize Russia along socialist lines; then begin the revolutionary war, never ceasing for a moment to prepare for it.
16. … If revolution breaks out in Germany within the next quarter to half year, we will win—despite the hardships of revolutionary war.

But if revolution comes later, there is a 99-in-100 chance that the weary worker and peasant will overthrow our power, handing authority over to adventurers who will then conclude an even worse annexationist peace.
17. We have no right to place the fate of the socialist revolution in Russia at the mercy of such shaky, utterly unverifiable conditions.
18. Which is better: to lose Poland + Lithuania + Courland + etc., or to lose the socialist revolution in Russia?

Further:
Risk losing the socialist revolution over Poland and the like?

* Items “10. – (aa) (2)” and “11. – (bb) (4)” were crossed out in the manuscript. After item “11. – (bb) (4),”
Lenin added in the margin: “see 11 bis on the reverse side,” and also wrote in the margins: “see 11 bis.” Ed.

DRAFT THESIS STATEMENTS ON BANKING POLICY

There can be no doubt about the answer to this question.

19. Do not gamble everything on a swift (within a quarter to half a year) revolution in Europe; instead, systematically—and without recklessness—prepare for revolutionary war, leveraging the “occupation” of war between the two imperialist giants.

20. | The danger of the moment lies in policies built on grand gestures and revolutionary rhetoric.

21. Objectively speaking: either an alliance with Wilson or defeat—but under no circumstances an alliance with the imperialists.

22. The forces of both giant blocs are roughly equal, without us. Let them exhaust themselves (until revolution erupts among them), while we consolidate the socialist revolution. This is the more reliable path toward the international socialist revolution. It is the only path free from adventurism, free from recklessness, free from all‑or‑nothing gambles.

Written in early January, no later than January 7 (20), 1918.

First published in 1929.

In the Lenin Collection, Volume XI.

Printed from the manuscript.

DRAFT THESIS STATEMENTS ON BANKING POLICY*

1. Compile a report on the funds received from the banks.
2. Invite a sufficient number of experienced workers to expedite this undertaking.
3. Nationalization of the banks is to be maintained.
4. All banks are to be consolidated into a single People’s Bank of the Russian Republic.
5. The opening of as many branches as possible is to be encouraged.
6. Deposits are to be declared inviolable—though, of course, this in no way diminishes the state’s right to levy taxes.
7. Free check-based transactions are to be permitted.
8. Workers’ control is to be fully preserved—in both the disbursement of funds and other related areas.

* See Works, 5th ed., vol. 36, pp. 219–221. Ed.